So from what I see the next wave of attacks on our Second Amendment rights is an attack on our due process. In Oregon SB1551 was proposed to allow individuals to anonymously report someone as violent and have their guns taken away. HB 4147 is still a possibility to pass, originally written to permanently remove your ability to buy a gun if a faulty background check was delayed without cause. In any case the loss of rights come without any conviction of crime or due process of evidence based solely on accusations of anonymous persons.

The idea here is to take away the guns from individuals before they go berserk. The issue is these people haven’t committed a crime.... yet. So my question is, is there a way to remove guns from violent people without compromising due process for the innocent?

well because, from what I understand anyways, is these individuals haven’t committed a crime, yet, or been adjudicated for mental issues.

Click to expand...

Prior to 1970 many of the present day mass shooters would have been under long term lock and key, being medicated and treated for their mental illness, and unable to commit their crimes. But about 1970 the combination of balancing state budgets and "patients' rights" made mental hospitals obsolete. "Community treatment" was the term of the day. What it meant was that instead of being involuntarily committed to a state hospital for treatment, patients were released to go live in flophouse hotels on general assistance ($300 per month). I said at the time that we'd be seeing things like Newtown in the near future. I wasn't wrong.

Prior to 1970 many of the present day mass shooters would have been under long term lock and key, being medicated and treated for their mental illness.

Click to expand...

that’s true. Charles Whitman talked with his doctor that his psychoactive meds were giving him violent thoughts and tendencies... that was before his mass shooting, and that was in 1966. The pharmaceutical industry has been making millions off this and the result is the de-institutionalizing of mental hospitals and putting these individuals back into society to be cared for by society. Your prediction, unfortunately, is true.

But it is what it is and now politicians and people are taking away gun rights as the new solution to ignoring mentally disturbed individuals still in society. Who doesn’t want to take away guns from someone who is violent and physically abusive..... is there a way to remove guns from violent people without compromising due process for the innocent?

Let's just look at the big picture here. The odd nut with a gun is NO PROBLEM. If you listed that cause of death along with all the other possible ones, it would be so far down in the noise you couldn't find it. You might as well worry about getting struck by lightning. This is just another tactic the ruling class uses to deprive SANE people from having guns. That is where the real danger is.

Along the lines of topic..
I and my wife bought our first house back in 1990 in a quiet residential area. The neighbors were mainly "family" homes who's kids grew up and started their own lives, or younger couples beginning theirs. The area was fantastic. We didn't have to worry about our kids, or our safety.

Has this happened in your neighborhood?
Two years later, the family across the street that lived in a very large home, decided to sell. They no longer needed such a large house. The owners had a heck of time selling. It sat vacant for over a year with no respectable offers. One day while cutting the grass, several vehicles arrived at the house on the corner, with what appeared to me to be a work crew. Hmmm, I thought. Finally sold? No. Not sold. Leased to be used as a half-way house on release of the mentally ill. I and the neighbors were very concerned as there were lots of children living all around.

There was no in-home supervision to monitor any of what would go on there. The monitoring was more/less left up to the neighbors by calling the police of any problems. All of the occupants were on medication. Dumbified, lost, paranoid, and dialed down. When it became apparent some of them were off their meds, breaking windows, destroying, screaming, looking up in the sky, yelling profoundly, and walking outside in the buff, we'd had enough. We sold our place and moved.

The pattern of "releasing" mental hospital patients has escalated throughout the country ever since, making "us" their caretakers. Are these people being released, part of the issues of crazies with guns, today? Highly possible.

The pattern of "releasing" mental hospital patients has escalated throughout the country ever since, making "us" their caretakers. Are these people being released, part of the issues of crazies with guns, today? Highly possible.

Click to expand...

its actually a huge part of the problem. But to be honest its not the topic of this thread.

In nearly all of these shootings the suspect has some history of violence, domestic abuse, or other run-ins with the law. Is it possible to turn some of these type of crimes into convicted offences that prohibit possession of firearms?

In the case of the Kansas shooter authorities believe a restraining order issued to him hours before the rampage is what set him off. Restraining orders are worthless and do nothing to prevent violence, I’m curious... if a judge issues a restraining order isn’t it because the suspect has broken some kind of law? Isn’t threatening someone with violence already illegal?

What's interesting is political correctness removed mental institution, and now the political correct bunch are whining that all these crazy people are killing them?

Analogy: I live few miles from Wild Life Safari here, they have captive lions and tigers and all sorts of predators. I know some do not like seeing them locked up, but due to the ability to kill every human they see we try and make life comfortable and do our best.
Today how many in the town of Winston ( where the place is ) would die if the lions were allowed to roam free and not held captive until they did something bad and then you'de have to catch them and hope they didnt kill again.
Anyone else catch the rise in serial killers right after 1970?

Its sad and depressing that some people are so sick and ill they would have to be kept from harming others and themselves. But the alternative is people killing people more then they have and shootings are just the tip of the real crazy people that in all seriousness are mentally ill.
This is my opinion but after his sister was killed how many would say that Prozankis reaction are that of a rational sane man ? It is very possible if this was before 1970 he may even have been a patient based on his bizaar and erractic actions we see today.
Its also possible that Liberal Antis like him that released the mentally ill may have in fact helped kill his sister. So in a sense that radical thinking he has may be the same type that got his sister killed ? Is that sane ?
That is not a joke or humor. You think Burdick is a Same women ? Or the Governor of Oregon ?
Under past standards they would have possibly locked these nuts up.

no worries, actually I was responding more to the entire thread so far has been about the de-institutionalizing of America not just your reply. It is a part of the problem that I dont necessarily mind discussing but so far has distracted from my question and real topic. The thing is I wrote our politicians in opposition to SB1551 because it removes due process but I dont have much argument for how we can keep guns away from potentially violent individuals. Perhaps there is none, I'm not certain their is. The gun control community says we have to try "something" and they are not going to stop pushing more infringements so its easier to argue against if there is a better way to achieve what the "intent" is without infringing on the rights of the law abiding.

Thinking about mental hospitals, back then what were the requirements to commit someone to a mental institution? Were those requirement controversial or did they preserve due process in committing someone?

PS: Dunehopper, last year I was invited to deer hunt on private land just a few miles from the Wildlife Safari. Beautiful area to live.

Thinking about mental hospitals, back then what were the requirements to commit someone to a mental institution? Were those requirement controversial or did they preserve due process in committing someone?

Click to expand...

Family or law enforcement could commit someone involuntarily for 72 hours of observation. During that time the patient was evaluated by a psychiatrist and other staff. A hearing before a judge was then held where the patient was represented by an advocate and testimony was taken from hospital staff, law enforcement (if involved), family, and the patient. At the end of the hearing the patient was either released or held for 6 weeks of treatment, after which another hearing was held. Rinse and repeat.

Family or law enforcement could commit someone involuntarily for 72 hours of observation. During that time the patient was evaluated by a psychiatrist and other staff. A hearing before a judge was then held where the patient was represented by an advocate and testimony was taken from hospital staff, law enforcement (if involved), family, and the patient. At the end of the hearing the patient was either released or held for 6 weeks of treatment, after which another hearing was held. Rinse and repeat.

This is going to start off topic Koda but I'll try to get back. I feel that this supposed increase in mass shootings in the last "couple of years" can be directly laid at O's feet based on how he's handled several of the situations that have happened in his terms of office with the assistance of the media, (Micheal Brown, Furguson etc). Also, O gets the blame due to the pressures of the employment and economics situation this country is in which directly affects people. Normal lives generally require you to go to work, kids to school, family returns home, eat, go to bed, Repeat. Not so much now as a lot of the families it seems are all unemployed or struggling, have no pride or self worth, are home all day together, in lots of cases, drugged up together, prescription or illegal, and as all these symptoms pile up, it just becomes a bomb. Most of the latest shootings involved felons who shouldn't have been in possession of a firearm in the first place, so a preventative solution to this would be for the other half to either require the felon to get rid of the firearm or turn the felon in. For the odd duck that is completely legal and goes off, on the face of it, not much can be done as you have to commit the crime first, but, and this is a big but, the family really is the only solution in these cases and even then, some of these people, you just never see it coming. Personally, I really believe that this administration is driving this increase by causing division, racial tension, economic strife etc. There have always been and always will be nuts, fact of life, but with no faith or hope or employment, depending on others which causes self doubt, no pride or personal self worth and add in drugs and someone creating division on a national scale and you have a melting pot as we are in now. This administration wants our guns, not to make us safer and save lives, but for the power and only the power and we all know that, but if all the guns were gone today, would the mass killings stop, no they wouldn't, and proof of that is the history of DV killings in the past involving families killed with knives, bats, fire and whatever else driven people use to destroy their families for whatever reason. For the so called rampage killer of which there are really very few in comparison to car wreak fatalities, or work accidents etc. without firearms, these people resort to cars as in Las Vegas recently or knives as in China. In the end, not much law enforcement can do until a law is broken, families paying attention and people taking personal responsibilities such as reporting felons with weapons, reporting DV and filing charges, concealed carry for those of us who can and will can help, but until the politically correct, we don't want anyone's feeling hurt, just because he's crazy he still has the right to be free crowd changes, I don't see a lot of positive results in the future. Ramble over.

It seems like there should be a way to establish a due process for removing someone’s guns from them but I cant think of anything good. What I don’t understand is when someone gets to the point they seek a restraining order on someone why are they not pressing charges instead?

no worries, actually I was responding more to the entire thread so far has been about the de-institutionalizing of America not just your reply. It is a part of the problem that I dont necessarily mind discussing but so far has distracted from my question and real topic. The thing is I wrote our politicians in opposition to SB1551 because it removes due process but I dont have much argument for how we can keep guns away from potentially violent individuals. Perhaps there is none, I'm not certain their is. The gun control community says we have to try "something" and they are not going to stop pushing more infringements so its easier to argue against if there is a better way to achieve what the "intent" is without infringing on the rights of the law abiding.

Thinking about mental hospitals, back then what were the requirements to commit someone to a mental institution? Were those requirement controversial or did they preserve due process in committing someone?

PS: Dunehopper, last year I was invited to deer hunt on private land just a few miles from the Wildlife Safari. Beautiful area to live.

Click to expand...

the root issue in this sort of legislation is the lack of due process. I know Oregon law already provides for an identified individual to be taken into "protective custody" for up to 72 hours on someone's reasonably based say-so. Remember that HUGE kerfuffle about the Gentleman in the Medford area, perhaps six years ago, worked for the state and his supe got a burr under his saddle blanket and called LE claiming the guy was "distraught" and "unstable".... and whatever else he claimed.... happens he'd just got his tax return, had been gun shopping for a few weeks to figure out what he'd buy when it came, went and bought... you guessed it... one of them "black and ugly" rifles and some "standard capacity mags", and a .45ACP handgun, if memory serves. All put together, Jackson County Sheriff and OSP got their ehad together and figured this guy was about to head back up to his workplace and "deal with" his supe...... full SWAT team shows up at oh dark thirty, he's in the shower, was tricked into coming out onto the porch to chat.... "we're just checking on your safety, we had a report" sort of meme. Once on the porch he's arrested, slammed off to the nuthouse for an "evaluation", they bust down his door and raid the place, taking his new guns and the old ones (an arsenal was found in his house....) the shrinks turn him loose that afternoon, "he's fine"..... coppers kept his "arsenal" for way too long, I guess a court finally ordered it returned... what a mess... WHY? Because then that supe approached LE they never really questoined him to learn more, nor did they contact known familhy, co-workers, other friends, neighbours, they just "move em out we got a hot one"..... frreaked out the neighbours, bit mess in the news, I HOPE the County SHeriff did not get reelected again.... there MUST be protections in place to prevent "someone" from making exaggerated reports, not substantiated by anyone else, that can result in a big raid, incarceration, huge mess.....

California, at the press of their disgusting Attorney General Kamala Harris enacted the model law for this pattern of benaviour.... anyone can "report" someone.. on any grounds... and LE must move, clean out their arms "arsenal" ( can only imagine what my local fishwrap would print if someone reported me and they cleaned out my closets.... and all the "cluck clucks" of the dumb clucks would say "I thought there was something strange......"). I believe it is Virginia is working a similar bill through their lawmaking body, Oregon have one, and it seems another stte or three have them "in the hopper" as well.
Look behind all these..... Bloomburg and his Filthy Money are behind them. HE wants us all disarmed... one small category after another, Oregon already HAVE a good law, which has ben abused... but at least this guy in Medford was released from the looney bin that afternoon.. and the fact he went hope to discover his front door standing ajar when he had locked it, and the whole house ransacked, all his guns gone, and he did NOT go berko and kill SOMETHING proves he is quite stable and a non-threat.

Welcome to our community

As the center of our organization, this website provides a place for Northwest gun owners to converse,
organize, learn, educate, trade, and most importantly, work together to preserve our Second Amendment rights.

Sign up now to participate, it's completely free and takes only a few moments.

About Us

We believe the 2nd Amendment is best defended through grass-roots organization, education, and advocacy centered around individual gun owners. It is our mission to encourage, organize, and support these efforts throughout Oregon, Washington, and Idaho.